Lee Nak-yeon, the representative of the Democratic Party, is leaving the office on the 3rd at his office in the Assembly Hall after completing a closed meeting of the Supreme Council regarding the amnesty of former Presidents Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye. yunhap news
Lee Nak-yeon, the representative of the Democratic Party, said in a media interview on the 1st that there was no sympathy with the Blue House regarding the’pardonations of former presidents Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye.’ As the observations of the Blue House and Lee’s side were mixed with regard to the’pardon theory’, the controversy evolved from the controversy with CEO Lee, a party, as concerns about the’party-cheong rift’ grew.
Nak-Yeon Lee “What was taken out of the loyalty of national integration”
On the afternoon of the 3rd afternoon, Lee met with reporters after the meeting of the Supreme Commissioners, and said, “There was no such thing” when asked if there was rapport with the Blue House. Regarding the background of the amnesty, “overcoming the national crisis of the corona crisis, stabilizing people’s livelihoods, and restoring the economy is the urgent priority. I believe that this requires the people’s collective strength. That’s why I was telling you my loyalty to open national integration.” As a representative of the ruling party, he thought that it was necessary for national unity, so he independently brought out the amnesty theory without prior discussion with President Moon Jae-in. “The politics must also go beyond the camp politics of antagonism and confrontation to develop into a politics that achieves national unity. I have told you about my loyalty.” To the question,’Do you think the way to integrate should be amnesty?’, he answered, “I think that it is a part of (a pardon).” After Lee brought out the pardon for former Presidents Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak, different observations came and went inside and outside the party as to whether they had prior rapport with the Blue House. As only the parties can know whether the ruling party’s representative and the president rapport, there is an opinion within the party that “the pardon would not have been talked about without a rapport with the president” and that “it is not something that President Moon can communicate with.” I confronted it. Most of the Blue House officials had an atmosphere of’Geumsi Chomun’. Representative Lee, who was the party who brought out the amnesty, is not only politically irresponsible to neglect this situation, and if the burden of amnesty goes to President Moon, his position as the next runner will be shaken, and the controversy has evolved directly in two days. It seems to have decided to do it.
“Why do you burden the president?” ‘Shake’ kicked in with strong backlash
Earlier, a senior Blue House official said in a call on the same day, “Isn’t it possible that you had rapport with President Moon in advance? I know it wasn’t there.” Another senior official also said, “I don’t know. (But) I don’t think there may have been prior sympathies.” Another high-ranking official said, “The official position is that we have nothing to say.” In the Blue House, voices of dissatisfaction with Lee were also heard. It was said that if the ruling party’s representative publicizes the president’s intrinsic power of amnesty, “as if throwing a match,” the burden would inevitably return to the president. However, the story around CEO Nak-yeon Lee was different. According to Lee’s style, who usually cares about word by word, the president’s own authority, the issue of amnesty, could not have been brought up without prior coordination with the Blue House. Representative Lee’s key aide said, “In common sense, I think Lee would have coordinated with the Blue House in advance because he is not a person who does something alone. When the trial of former President Park Geun-hye is over, the burden of the Blue House (for pardon) will inevitably increase, so I think it is the purpose of the party to bear a certain amount of burden (in advance).” Another high-ranking passport official also said, “I think I talked with the President in advance. “The reason that CEO Lee pulled out amnesty in the New Year’s interview is a big aspect of trying to get public opinion before it becomes public opinion in earnest.”
Some argue that “the two presidents’ pardon is the joint fate of Moon Jae-in and Lee Nak-yeon”
Regardless of the prior rapport, it was also argued that President Moon and President Lee were “same fate” as far as the former president’s pardon was concerned. Democratic Party PR Chairman Park Soo-hyun, who served as the first spokesman for’Blue House Moon Jae-in’, told Facebook, “The pardon for the former president is the inevitable political fate of President Moon Jae-in, and it is also the fate of the Democratic Party and Lee Nak-yeon. This issue cannot be left as the burden of the President. We must ease the burden of the President. That is why it is also the fate of the party and its representatives.” Since the amnesty was a matter that had to be discussed, whether the president or the ruling party representative, it was a matter of taking it as a “political reality,” and starting public debate, rather than questioning whether President Lee or President Moon is a “prior rapport” that is difficult to disclose. By Jung Hwan-bong and Seo Young-ji, staff reporter [email protected]